dionisLol, go and check for yourself, the simplistic analysis is very useful as it clearly shows Ivanov is talking cr*p. As I pointed out in that post it was almost certainly more.
Says the arm chair general. Good stuff. Go and show the Russian government what it’s all about! Your analysis doesn’t indicate much, other than take the most active shipbuilding period for the Soviet Navy in terms of advanced fighting vessels.
dionisOMG, go back through the previous page, I have already provided numbers for 1987 (a nice year as its exactly 20 from last year) and if you look you will see it certainly is not ‘practically the same’.:rolleyes:
7 vessels that year. And are you certain that’s a bad year? Lets see a better year.
Your analysis is too simplistic to be of any use here.
Fact of the matter is, the Russians have $45bn. to spend on new ships.
To Ivanov, that’s enough to feel confident that the Russians can build lots of new ships now.
Clearly though, ignorant forum trolls like you would think they would know better than the Russian Minister of Defense.
dionisYes but you did not take it with a pinch of salt did you.:rolleyes:
And in what years were all those ships laid down…….because I can tell you now it was not in the same year and there is no way that 40 frigates have been laid down. At best 1 maybe 2 new frigates, in a addition a small number of corvettes (probably around 5), again spread over a number of years. As for planned units, likely 20 project 20380 and 20 project 22350 to make your 40. The terms frigate and corvette have little actual meaning in modern designation systems and both classes could be referred to as frigates.
Oh and the clue was in the question, the latter Soviet years so pick any one from say 1980 to 1989 if you like.
Why don’t we see some numbers from you now, on stuff laid down in 1981, 82, 83, etc.. . And in those specific years. Not what was still left laid down from the late 70s, etc.
And the numbers provided above, I guess, compare according to Ivanov to the USSR’s navy. 5+ subs have been laid down in the past 8 years, and some mix of project 20380 and 22350, probably about 10 in total. 15 boats laid down in 8 years? or 7 years? or 5? Hard to say.
If it turn out to be 3 or 4 boats per year now on average, and back in the 80s (or 70s, which part of the USSR’s history was he referring to?), it was say 4 or 5 or 6 boats per year, that’s still “practically” the same. Ivanov was also referring more to the future I’d bet, I can say with pretty high certainty in the next 2 years there are going to be some serious developments in the Navy in Russia.
http://warfare.ru/?linkid=1720&catid=243&pending=true
24 ships in construction. Take or give a few.
dionisSo come on then, give us a direct comparison of how many ships and of what type were laid down in any of the latter Soviet years (the ones Ivanov was clearly hoping to draw reference too) and today. Instead of resorting to insults try contributing something here.:rolleyes:
Direct comparison to what?
The statement of “practically as many ships as in the Soviet times” should be taken with a pinch of salt, you know?
We’ll have to assume slightly less. . . but the real question is how does “laid down” relate to what he said.
Consider the following:
3 SSBNs have been laid down, Borei type subs.
1 Yasen/Severodvinsk class is about to hit the water. More planned likely.
“40 boat” Frigate series is laid down.
Either 20 of these are the Gorshkov class with Onyx batteries, or this is an additional 20 to another 40 of some other class. Clarification here would be great.
5x laid down Stereguschyy / 1x Neustrashimyy have been launched / are launching as well.
Some sort of carrier program is proposed post 2015. 6 carriers supposedly.
As Ivanov mentioned, money is no longer the issue. It’s how do you get the ships 3 years down the line, not 5.
Other question that remains is what are they doing about larger vessels.
dionisThe Russian Federation can sell a lot of manufactured products for “half price” compared to their Japanese, German or American competition, but Russia still has a lot of problems selling their cars and TVs abroad, don’t they?
You could try to make a distinction between Russia and the Soviet Union!!:)
You will find that they are two very different countries with very different philosphies in the design, production, marketing and selling of its aerospace products. The Su-30MKIs in Indian service are probably more advanced than any aircraft in the Russian air force – a scenario that would never have happened 20 years ago in the old Soviet Union (to give an example).
Russian appliances obviously lack the advanced features, or more notably, the BRAND POWER of Western ones. Sukhoi and MiG have been around forever, and everyone knows them. Business much? 😉
The Su-27SM is claimed to be better than the Su-30MKI by Russian officials. Of course, this forum’s geniuses know better.
dionislol dude german cars are nice and all but a mitsubishi evo would beat BMWs and Mercs on the road so bad it wouldnt even be a contest – more reliable to.
Thats nice that you can get a two for one deal on the flanker for one eagle but how many PAK-FA’s can you get for a Raptor…, thats if it ever materialises which i doubt. Trouble is though buying from the Russians its not politically acceptable for many countries due to Russian goverment behavior over the last – well 50 – 60 years i guess, there not known for being a good country to buy weapons of, i mean you’ve said it yourself Dionis in the last thread they won’t export anything thats not downgraded to ‘monkey model’ standards – who wants a monkey model jet that might be bargain basement price but has rubbish after sales support and is downgraded, i sure wouldn’t would you…? Edit: whats me not being able to afford a German car got to do with anything, i could if i want btw but choose not too, are you implying German cars are better but overpriced? Those Algerian MIGs are a classic example of why not to by Russian and the issues came as no suprise to many including myself.
German cars are more expensive because they are by far more comfortable, better equipped. They are as such treated more as items of luxury, and so they are also more expensive, yes. Anything but a Lexus feels like a plastic piece of crap compared to any Mercedes or BMW. To each his own, maybe.
In tmers of aircraft, “monkey model” Flankers like the Su-30MKI can still best any F-15, or half of a new F-15, rather. Granted, according to Zelin I think, even the Su-27SM is going to outperform the MKI. Yes, it’s Soviet and Russian policy. Get over it.
Why wouldn’t the PAK FA come about? Their Navy is building ships at rates of the Soviet times now, and Putin has recently called for building NEW aircraft as a priority, along with upgrading the old ones.
dionisI mentioned the recessed fairing because the genius at Wikipedia mentioned the Kh-20 as well…and that one isn’t fitting underwing!
I was hoping for a more thorough explanation, since there seems to be a serious lack of radar information on Russian bombers. 😛 That would be the best explanation for a Bear H being able to (or not to) perform AShM missions.
dionisBasically everything else is better than Russian and much worse than American and the rest is ‘somewhere in between’.
thats actually not a bad summery. 🙂 Edit: i am actually being serious too, i mean its no skin off my nose that yanks make the best fighters, just like its no skin off my nose that the japanese make the best cars – if you ask me anyway. i’m sure russia makes the best of something, vodka maybe but i just don’t think planes are now there strong point, unless you like airshows and fancy loops and cobras or whatever.
Except that the Germans make better cars in general, but you probably can’t afford one. Good logic.
What’s funny about Russian vs American at the moment, is that you can buy two Su-3x aircraft vs one new F-15 variant. Now considering a lot of people even here would tell you even a single Russian fighter would be better, that’s pretty awful news.
dionisI dont need to prove they cant, you are the one claiming they can and if you want to be taken seriously you have to provide evidence to back it up. We have been through this lesson several times, I can claim that the US has a death star, you can not disprove it (after all its an uber secret weapon that only certain people know about) therefore it must exist. A claim without support is just a theory, there is nothing wrong with theories if you say that is what they are but it is wrong to present them as fact as you insist on doing. The reason you do this is that you are a fan boy.
If you are to be taken seriously as well, you need to provide sources against my ideas then. If you have nothing concrete, too bad. #1 FAN BOY!!
dionisBecause the Kh-65 is a new design with a new forward fueslage, new guidance systems, and a large concentional warhead taking up far more internal space than the nuclear round, which is part of the reason that the Kh-65 doesn’t have the range of the Kh-55. Being heavier doesn’t help that either, of course.
Could they rework the Kh-55s into Kh-65s? Probably, but it’d be a lot more involved than just lopping off the front end and replacing it, what with the new avionics, warhead, etc.
They’re listing all of the Tu-95’s weapons, not just those carried by the Tu-95MS. The Tu-95MS was designed from the Tu-142 airframe as a cruise missile carrier to employ the Kh-55. Beyond that, look at the bottom of one, there are no fairings for the recesses needed to accomodate the Kh-22 or any other large cruise missile.
Podvig is certainly a credible source regarding anything to do with Russia’s nuclear forces. Forget his blog, that’s only the tip of the iceberg. What you need is his book, Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces. Truly an excellent reference source.
Also, regarding Admiral Lazarev, here are the dates when the vessel was imaged in both locations:
6 June 2005 – Bolshoy Kamen
23 August 2007 – Abrek BayClearly the ship was moved, and that explains why you see it twice in Google Earth!
Yeah figured it was Lazarev because of the way the ship looks as well.
I’ve seen/read the book SOC. Fact of the matter is, there were 45+ K22 variant Bears in 1998 and apparently none in 2000. It’s possible, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the scrapping delayed a bit and there were a few airframes in flying condition left.
I assume the main reason the latest Bears can’t carry the Kh-22 would only be lack of the Down Beat / Leninets type radar. The Bear should have carried the Kh-22s underneath its wings, so the recess isn’t an issue I think. The noses of the Bear G / H are similar, so you can’t rule out the possibility it perhaps being possible.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/kh-65.htm
Apparently the Kh-65 is actually a modded Kh-101 now as well? :confused:
Kinda hard to know which type of missiles the Russians are building at the moment.
dionisI’d personally wear more protection than just ear plugs. That guy is never going to get the plugs out now–they probably got pushed past his eardrums. 🙂
I’d say it would be far better than nothing. Ear plugs are sufficient for indoor rifle firing in my experience, which is pretty darn loud.
dionisAgain, where are your sources, the answer is simple, you have none becouse what you want to believe is just pure fantasy you are a fan boy.
The fact that you resort to insults and criticism of spelling just goes to show how absolutely flawed your ability to engage in discussion is. Now, once again, where are your sources? And in case you had forgotten everything is produced by individuals so I dont quite know what you were aiming at with that but it just undermined you even further.
You still fail to prove that the Russians can not modify their equipment on short notice in case it is needed. I say you are delusional. And talking about fan boys, like I said, you LEAD the US “fan boys” here.
dionisI generally think that we (=the Forumers) have the ability to overestimate. But apart the bovine merde ping pong match between some posters the thread contains some very useful information, especially from Jonesy and some others.
Generalizations about how a battle works aren’t very helpful.
That thread needed an actual scenario. And considering the US is never going to be able or will invade mainland Russia, it would in turn have to be a conflict fought over another nation’s sovereignty. Likely the Middle East.
dionisAgain, where are your sources, (wikipedia does not count, for obvious reasons) that is all that is asked of you but you can not provide them, the reason being that you have none and this is all just the wet dream of a fan boy. The fact that you have resorted to critisising spelling is demonstrative of how weak your argument is and low your credibility has now fallen.
I have told you to go an ask Pavel but you have not, the reason is simple………………you know what the answer will be and your fan boy pride will not let you hear it.
Pavel is just a guy. What he says does not mean anything more than what you or I say. He is not Russian military at the moment. That’s what count. You are like a broken record. Worse maybe. You are the US fan boy club LEADER on this forum. So like I said, discredit my suggestions with anything credible. You can’t. Keep going. I’m awaiting the same reply for the 10th time. Your spelling just proves you are an idiot. Period.
dionisThat is becouse you have no evidence, if you had some you would provide it, the same apllies to the MS carrying Kh-22. Just provide some evidence, that is all I have asked of you and you have failed every time. This is all becouse you are a fan boy.
Prove it can’t carry it. Fan boy! You failed every time. :rolleyes:
Prove the Russian CAN’T re-arm their Kh-55s into Kh-65s on a short notice.
Prove they can’t produce the Kh-41 if necessary within short notice.
Check the spelling of the word “because” while you are at it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu-95
Basic source. Bottom. Stats for MS model. Kh-22 can be carried. :confused:
Also, what about the Tu-142 which is maritime optimized.
I find it hilarious you are still so worked out about these possible weapons systems when they are the least of the worries of any US fleet unlucky enough to be fired upon by Russian AShMs.
Secondly, prove Pavel’s godly log is correct, and every one of 50+ Tu-95K22s is already scrap metal. Come on, you are so smart! Surely this is a simple task.
Sign In
